> Surely if I own the
> copyright in a painting, displaying it in a different frame does not
> create a derivative work.
Wouldn't that depend on the frame? There are frames and there are frames. Should the frame be a work in itself, and somehow take away from, or excessively add to, the original work, the court might have found a different result. The issue of derivative works is fact intensive, and cannot be generallized as you have.
> I don't see why online framing should be any
> different, UNLESS it creates a likelihood of confusion (becuase it isn't
> clear that it was framed by another) or otherwise constitutes unfair
> competition (because it obscures ads that would otherwise be seen). But
> those are unfair competition arguments.
I think that many of the same fact patterns can also support a copyright infringement claim. If the origin of the work is somehow confused or mispresented, there may well be claims for infringement.
> I don't see it as a copyright
> issue, but I do recognize that others may have a different opinion.
I think that it really would depend strongly on the facts, and how the frame is used. Of course, the wronged party would probably rather have a case for infringement, because statutory damages may be available. Further, I wonder if there aren't some DMCA considerations?
-Bodi Received on Fri Apr 11 2003 - 08:16:21 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:48 GMT